Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
CNNW 8
CSPAN 5
MSNBCW 2
KPIX (CBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
to draw down in afghanistan, and we have a continuing effort against al qaeda, and as we achieve some of those important goals, the united states is moving towards the end of the longest sustained armed conflict in the nation's history, and i would also like to take a moment to express my pride in the men and women in uniform who have fought throughout that period, putting their lives on line to protect this country. were it not for their sacrifices, were in not for their willingness to do that, we would not be able to accomplish what we have. thank god they are there. [applause] one thing i found out when i came from the cia to the defense department, i have a lot of great joy is. -- i have a hell of a lot of great choice. i have got great weapons, a -- i have a hell of a lot of great great ships, great plains, great toys. \ technologies, but none of that would be worth anything without the good men and women in uniform that serve this country and did it take their lives to protecting this country. that is the real strength of the united states of america. as we transition into this
-- against al qaeda is moving beyond clear combat zone. he also discusses the impact of the so-called fiscal cliff, also budget cuts to the defense department. this is an hour and 15 minutes. [applause] >> thank you for coming. it is an honor to be back and an honor to be introducing my old boss. as you know, secretary of the net debt is one of the most respected and experienced hands in washington. his resume is legendary. chairman of the budget committee back in the day when they actually passed a budget, director of the office of management and budget, and chief of staff to president clinton when the white house, director of the central intelligence agency, and now secretary of defense, so the question is what in the world are you going to do next. this extraordinary resume does not do justice to the man. leon panetta is a wonderful human being and in some ways a man of contrasts. i am going to give you examples. he is known among his counterparts around the world for his warm italian bear hugs. he is also known for the laser light focus he displayed on hunting down osama bin laden. he of
" for al qaeda. remember, the administration said she was working from edited talking points. the question is, who did the editing? today, the senators say that acting director morell told them the fbi did. they say they later heard from the cia that he had quote, misspoken and the cia was, in fact, responsible. so what's going on here? cnn intelligence correspondent suzanne kelly has been working her sources. she's joining us now. suzanne, you just got a statement from the cia. what are they saying? >> reporter: actually, i've gotten this statement from an intelligence official who told me it was in fact the cia that made the changes which is more or less what the intelligence community has been saying from the beginning, that this was a collaborative effort within the intelligence community to get their language straight and that the reasons they were doing it had to do with, as you know, classified sources. i can read you what the u.s. intelligence official has just told me. there were literally just coming in on my phone. there were several valid intelligence and investigatory reasons
kind of. -- against al qaeda. i would like to take a moment to express my pride in the men and women in uniform who have fought throughout the time putting their lives on the line to protect this country. were it not for their sacrifices, for their willingness to do that, we would not be able to accomplish what we have. thank god they are there. one thing i've found out is i have a lot of great stories of the defense department. --great toys at the defense department, but none of that would be anything without the good men and women in uniform who give their lives to protect this country. that is the real strength of the united states of america. as we transition to this new era, we will have to look at some important priorities that will take on greater urgency, particularly as we look at the second term of this administration and look at what are the challenges we are going to be confronting. this is not like the past where we come out of a period of war and the threats kind of and everyone winds up cutting out of the defense budget. this is a time where even as we come out of the
. "the communicators" airs tonight on c-span. >> last week, he talked about the strategy toward al qaeda. this is about one hour and 15 minutes. >> good evening. thank you for coming. it is an honor to be introducing my boss. he is one of the most respected and experienced hands in washington. his reputation is legendary. he's chairman of the house budget committee when the actually passed a budget. his chief of staff to president clinton in the white house. now secretary of defense. what in the world are you going to do next? this is not action do justice to the man. leon panetta is a wonderful human being and in some ways a man of contrasts. i am going to give you examples. he is known among his counterparts around the world for his warm italian bear hugs. he is also known for the laser light focus he displayed on hunting down osama bin laden. he often holds meetings in his pentagon office with his dog curled up around his feet as he is pressing a commander on how a war plan is going to advance or how they are going to make more progress. when traveling, who he is known to hang out in
to disrupt, degrade, dismantle and ultimately defeat those who attacked america on 9/11. al qaeda. since september 11, 2001, our country has worked relentlessly to bring those responsible for the worst terrorist attacks in our history to justice. we have made very clear that we are at war with al qaeda. we've also made clear in going after osama bin laden and dozens of others that nobody attacks the united states and gets away with it. and we have made clear that we will do everything possible to ensure that such an attack never , never happens again. that means counterterrorism will continue as a key mission to our military and intelligence professionals. as long as violent extremists pose a direct threat to the united states, our allies and global interests, we have a responsibility to counter that threet. during my tenure as director of the c.i.a. and secretary of defense, i have truly been privileged to meet and work with thousands of professionals who have made this fight their fight, who have put their lives on the line for their country and who have built the most effective global
the work of terrorists, perhaps affiliated with al qaeda. in an appearance on "face the nation" five days after the attack, rice gave no hint of that. >> we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned. >> reporter: last week, former c.i.a. director david petraeus told congressional panels in closed sessions that someone in the obama administration removed references to terrorism and al qaeda from his agency summary before it went to rice. a source told us the edits were made by the office of the director of national intelligence. republican senators john mccain and lindsey graham have led the call for a special committee to investigate. >> i was on "face the nation" the morning she came on and told that incredible story, and right after it, the president of the libyan national assembly said it was al qaeda. we know it was al qaeda. and yet she never changed her story. >> reporter: rice also shot back against mccain's criticisms. >> i do think that some of the statements he's made about me have been unfounded. but i look forward to
it a spontaneous demonstration sparked by an antimuslim film and did not mention the link to al qaeda. after all this taking on her critics, the republican senators weren't impressed. >> bottom line, i'm more dist b disturbed now than i was before that the 16 september explanation about how four americans died in benghazi, libya, by ambassador rice, i think does not do justice to the reality at the time and in hindsight clearly was completely wrong. >> rice maintains she did nothing wrong. issuing a statement saying we stressed that neither i nor anyone else in the administration intended to mislead the american people at any stage of this process. peter brooks is a former deputy assistant secretary of defense, general wesly clark and, of course, former democratic presidential candidate. senator mccain was asked who do you blame more at this point? ambassador rice or president obama? he says the president is ultimately responsible. do you agree this is no longer about susan rice? she has cleared the air about her name? >> i don't think so. i mean, i'll let the senator speak for himself, i wasn'
. the unclassified talking points she used were provided by the cia, were stripped of these references to al qaeda, because the information was classified and couldn't be delivered in public. now, after the meeting, ambassador rice acknowledged those talking points turned out to be incorrect. but that she stressed she and the administration never meant to mislead the american people. and what the senators are saying is, as a cabinet member, ambassador rice is privy to this conflicting information, she should have been more discerning when she went on those talk shows, and that the secretary of state should ambassador rice be nominated needs more independent, not just held to party lines. let's take a listen to what senators graham and ayotte said yesterday after those meetings. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than i was before. >> certainly she misled the american public. i think that she would say that. she'd have to say that. >> now, soledad, ambassador rice is not without her supporters. democrats on the hill say rice's republican critics are still the ones politicizing the benghazi atta
. for example, she also said al qaeda was decimated. that is pat. ly false. i asked why that statement should be made to the american people and she really had no good answer for it. there was lots of classified information that she gets briefed on that indicated this was not a hateful video that sparked a spontaneous democrat congratulation. i still don't understand why anyone who believe when you come with mortars and rocket propelled grenades how that could possibly be viewed as a spontaneous demonstration. there are a lot of layers to this. >>neil: we tried for ambassador rice and we got a statement from her office, saying we wish that we had perfect information days after the attack. the intelligence often, the assessment has evolved. >>guest: that is another big question, why would it have evolved? there were people who were survivors who were flown to germany who were interviewed by the f.b.i. they told, they said, absolutely, there was no demonstration. yet for a couple of weeks the intelligence community seemed to be wrestling with intelligence and other classified information they h
that went to the daily briefing said this was a terrorist attack with groups connected to al qaeda. the others gave a different impression, if not contradicting that. like it was a protest. the person who delivered the talking points was susan rice. she said something that i think republicans believe she knew wasn't true. she said it, she must from known it wasn't true. >> i don't follow that logic for two reasons. why would she know it wasn't true. >> because the classified information at the time contradicted it. >> right. but the point is intelligence contradicts itself all the time. in fact, you have numerous channels of information that are intentional or can both be true, both a terrorist attack and people there because of the movie, which seemed like what was the case. so, if you were given one set of talking points that were classified i don't see why -- do you go back to the cia and say you are contradicting yourself? >> maybe it's the intelligence community here and you want to obscure the fact we know who the terrorists were -- >> this is petraeus' argument at the closed
briefing said this was a terrorist attack with groups connected to al qaeda. and then the up classified talking points gave a very different impression. the person who delivered those talking points was susan rice. she said something republicans believe wasn't true. >> i don't follow that logic. why would she know it wasn't true? and second of all -- >> because the classified information at the time contradicted it. >> right, but the point is, intelligence contradicts itself all the time. in fact, you have numerous channels of intelligence can be both a terrorist attack and people there because of the movie, and so if you were given one set of talking points that are classified and then a litter iteration that are unclassified, do you go back to the cia and say you guys are contradicting yourself? >> maybe it's the intelligence community here, and there are reasons why you would want to obscure the fact that we would know who the terrorists were, if there was -- >> which is petraeus' argument. >> i don't necessarily buy that either. but the point being at the time, the intelligence comm
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)